Executive Summary

The talk addressed evolving dynamics in international politics, focusing on India’s strategic autonomy within an emerging multipolar world order. The Speaker reflected on the trajectory of India–U.S. relations, the implications of anti-globalisation trends, and the technological and geopolitical dimensions of Indo-Pacific security. The discussion was set against the backdrop of shifting global power equations, including the growing contestation between the United States and China, and India’s efforts to navigate an increasingly complex environment.

Detailed Discussion

The Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy chaired the interaction. He welcomed the Speaker, Professor K.P. Vijayalakshmi, currently with the Department of Geopolitics and International Relations at the Manipal Academy of Higher Education, who previously taught at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.

Amb. Chinoy introduced the topic of the session – “U.S.-India Tariff Tensions and Strategic Negotiations: Geopolitical Challenges and Opportunities.” He noted that India’s relationships with both China and the United States are evolving within a complex geopolitical environment. The U.S.-India Partnership, he emphasised, is strong and vital irrespective of political leadership in either country.

Amb. Chinoy stated that over the past two decades, India’s global stature has risen, driven by its economic growth and technological capabilities. He highlighted India’s inclination for multipolarity at both regional and global levels, contrasting it with China’s ambitions and Washington’s unease over a changing international order. His remarks closed with reflections on how India’s actions and choices at this stage will shape its strategic trajectory and relations with major powers.

Professor Vijayalakshmi began by situating the discussion within a global context characterised by rising nationalism, anti-globalisation sentiments, and a gradual movement toward multipolarity. It was emphasised that while globalisation is not retreating completely, it has fragmented into multiple regional and interest-based blocs. The Speaker underscored that the world is now experiencing a “multi-polarising” trend where no single power dominates – creating both opportunities and uncertainties for India’s foreign policy.

Focusing on India’s position, the Speaker noted that India’s geopolitical approach remains rooted in strategic autonomy, though it increasingly intersects with issue-based alignments such as the Quad and Indo-Pacific frameworks. The United States, while maintaining a leadership role, is seen to be re-evaluating its own strategic commitments amid domestic and structural constraints.

The Speaker highlighted the following aspects:

• Interdependence and Multipolarity:

The world is no longer defined by a unipolar or bipolar framework. Instead, new poles of influence are emerging, driven by technological innovation, economic interdependence, and national capabilities. India’s policy discourse must evolve beyond Cold War binaries and recognise the fluidity of modern power relations.

• Anti-Globalisation:

The rise of anti-globalisation in several countries, including advanced economies, has disrupted the liberal order and complicated international economic and political coordination. This has particularly affected the U.S., where protectionist tendencies have reshaped its global engagement.

• India’s Strategic Autonomy:

India continues to pursue an independent path, balancing relations with major powers while preserving its decision-making flexibility. The Speaker underlined that strategic autonomy should not be confused with isolationism but viewed as a calibrated engagement model.

• S.–India Relations and Policy Shifts:

The Speaker traced the evolution of bilateral relations from early cooperation to contemporary technological and defence partnerships. Despite temporary political strains- particularly during Trump’s first term- both countries have maintained a robust institutional framework of dialogue.

The bilateral relationship has been sustained through mutual trust, shared strategic goals, and a recognition that a strong, prosperous India aligns with American interests.

• Technological Cooperation and Restrictions:

A significant portion of the talk dealt with technology transfers and defence-industrial collaboration. The Speaker observed that while India seeks greater access to advanced technologies, the U.S. remains cautious due to compliance frameworks and trust deficits. There is a need to institutionalise mechanisms that ensure mutual benefits, particularly in emerging domains like AI, quantum technologies, and defence co-production.

• China and the Indo-Pacific:

The talk emphasised that India’s approach to the Indo-Pacific is not one of containment but of ensuring regional stability and open supply chains. The U.S.–China technological and strategic rivalry has implications for India, which must avoid binary alignments while deepening strategic cooperation where interests converge.

• Perceptions and Public Diplomacy:

The Speaker also highlighted the importance of perception management and consistent political signalling in India–U.S. ties. While structural mechanisms like the 2+2 Dialogue and Quad have created institutional depth, public and political narratives continue to shape policy outcomes.

The discussion underscored that India’s foreign policy must operate within the reality of an interdependent yet fragmented global system. While multipolarity allows for greater manoeuvrability, it also demands agility and strategic clarity. The future of India–U.S. relations lie in sustained trust-building, technological collaboration, and maintaining a balance between autonomy and alignment.

The Speaker’s reflections also indicated that while the U.S. remains a crucial partner, India’s global aspirations necessitate diversified partnerships across Asia, Africa, and Europe. The long-term success of bilateral cooperation will depend on aligning national capabilities with shared strategic outcomes rather than declaratory statements alone.

Q&A Session

The Q/A session revolved around U.S. foreign policy under Trump, shifts in U.S. views toward India, the China–Pakistan dynamic, and broader geopolitical trends in the Indo-Pacific. It included interventions by the Chairperson, Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy.

A question was raised on whether the change in U.S. perception of India was a lasting “transformational shift” or just a temporary Trump-era phenomenon. The Speaker argued that there was indeed a transformational shift under Trump, marked by more direct, pragmatic, and transactional behaviour. However, she added that it might not be permanent- rather, a reactive phase driven by domestic pressures such as immigration, inflation, and trade issues.

The discussion noted the fracturing of bipartisan consensus in U.S. politics, which has historically underpinned foreign policy stability. The Speaker emphasised that this division was not caused by India, but reflected deeper domestic political polarisation between Democrats and Republicans. The weakening of bipartisan consensus made U.S. foreign policy appear less predictable and more populist.

The “Make America Great Again (MAGA) Club” was described as a distinct faction within the Republican Party- comprising populists, conservatives, and militarists. These groups seek U.S. global primacy but differ from traditional Republicans who valued stability and alliance-based order. The Speaker noted that Trumpists tend to admire strong, centralised leadership styles (even referencing Xi Jinping) and believe that “order must be created from chaos.” This ideological shift affects how Republicans approach relations with India, China, and global governance.

A number of questions pertained to the China–Pakistan relationship and whether a trust deficit exists. The Speaker suggested that while Beijing and Islamabad have strategic cooperation, the relationship lacks deep trust due to asymmetric dependence. Historically, the U.S. tolerated Pakistan’s balancing role between Washington and Beijing, viewing it as useful rather than threatening. India, by contrast, is now seen as a more stable partner- but one still navigating the ambiguity of U.S. intentions.

Professor K.P. Vijayalakshmi highlighted that the U.S.–India relationship remains the most crucial within the Quad, as other members (Japan, Australia) already have formal treaty alliances with Washington. The future of the Quad depends largely on how strongly the Indo–U.S. partnership develops. There are still doubts about whether the Quad represents a coherent new order (“G2 or G2.0”) or remains a fragile alignment.

The Speaker and the Chairperson agreed that India must balance its freedom of action- especially concerning its China and Pakistan policies- without overcommitting to U.S. preferences.

The final part of the discussion reviewed the Cold War context, noting that the U.S. never truly objected to China–Pakistan rapprochement. Even during the 1950s, Pakistan was part of both SEATO and CENTO, serving as a medium of engagement between Washington and Beijing. Professor Vijaylakshmi concluded that while Trump’s rhetoric brought attention to these linkages, U.S. policy continuity toward Pakistan remains strong, though India now occupies a larger strategic space.

The discussion ended on the note that Trumpism introduced a new, volatile dynamic in U.S. foreign policy. While India benefited from strategic convergence, its future depends on how enduring these shifts are, beyond Trump’s personality-driven politics.

The Director General, Amb. Chinoy thanked the speaker and the audience.

Report prepared by Ms. Khyati Singh, Research Analyst, North America and Strategic Technologies Centre, MP-IDSA.